Poll: U.S. Catholics want a younger, more liberal pope

[BackToTheRock]

But you implied this very thing as often happens when debating liberals. If I disagree with you it’s only because of political ties; “Oh, it can’t be true because he is a mouthpiece for the GOP.”

No, I didn’t imply this. I think cozying up to any political party is a dangerous thing to do. They might give voice to some issues that we appear to agree on but they can quickly turn if they think support will turn away. Look at the calls from some prominant GOP leaders to soft-pedal on abortion in the wake of the last election.

I can assure you that if I am a mouthpiece for anything it will not be a party that stands for evil like the democrat platform. No Catholic can stand with them and not be against Church teaching. The reason we as Catholics don’t know this and reject it so flippantly is that we who preach, the clergy, for the most part do not preach the truth from the pulpit. We preach NICE (well I don’t), well nice doesn’t get anyone closer to salvation; in fact it leads us to the road to destruction which is wide and highly traveled.

Now you’re preaching, brother! Back to my Protestant days - I often heard clergy say “Change comes slowly”. Well . . . that can be true. But it comes even slower when you don’t address issues with itegrity!

 

[LisaA]

Amen Lisa, and this Pope will have an opportunity tuesday to reject Joe Biden’s presentation of him self for communion as he is said to be traveling to the Mass of Installation representing the government of the USA. I pray he holds to his witness to all church leaders.

This was my thought immediately. I wish our delegation consisted of faithful Catholics rather than those who have tried to disassociate their personal views with their public stance on the subject. Therer are many public figures who are devout Catholics…why not one of them instead?

I just hope Joe Biden doesn’t present himself for Communion during his trip to Rome.

Lisa

 

[LisaA]

No, I didn’t imply this. I think cozying up to any political party is a dangerous thing to do. They might give voice to some issues that we appear to agree on but they can quickly turn if they think support will turn away. Look at the calls from some prominant GOP leaders to soft-pedal on abortion in the wake of the last election.

Now you’re preaching, brother! Back to my Protestant days - I often heard clergy say “Change comes slowly”. Well . . . that can be true. But it comes even slower when you don’t address issues with itegrity!

Curious what “proominent GOP leaders” requested that abortion be promoted. I keep a pretty good tab on the political realm and have not heard of this.

As to “change comes slowly,” I’m glad that didn’t occur when St Paul was persecuting Christians. Getting knocked off one’s horse can make an immediate change and I truly wish my Protestant friends would realize the squishy relativism of their denomination is making them irrelevant.

Lisa

 

[lynnvinc]

Well, we got an older (and wiser) pope, but one who seems to be quite liberal on the most important social issues, such as poverty, and conservative on the personal issues of sexual morality and living a chaste, non-profligate, simple life. This gladdens my heart to no end. He is a leader we all can follow. I’m ecstatic! (Why did I ever doubt the Holy Spirit would fail in this. Shame on me.)

 

[BackToTheRock]

Curious what “proominent GOP leaders” requested that abortion be promoted. I keep a pretty good tab on the political realm and have not heard of this.

As to “change comes slowly,” I’m glad that didn’t occur when St Paul was persecuting Christians. Getting knocked off one’s horse can make an immediate change and I truly wish my Protestant friends would realize the squishy relativism of their denomination is making them irrelevant.

Lisa

Good morning Lisa. Allow me to clarify - I wasn’t saying that some GOP leaders said abortion should be promoted but that some didn’t believe it was wise to put these “cultural issues” such as abortion, birth control, and gay marriage front and center. In other words it’s more about shifting emphasis than flipping on support. I share the beliefs of many on this forum in supporting candidates who reflect our faith and, like many on this forum, have been on the losing side a lot in recent years. I’ll continue to support such candidates but I trust the Church a lot more than I trust the shifting sands of political process.

 

[marywarfield]

Even if these polls reflected the truth about what U.S. Catholics think, all that they show is that U.S. Catholics are out of touch with their religion, not the other way around. Consider, for example, that if the Magisterium contradicted its infallible decision on the ordination of priests, it would mean the falsification of the whole Christian religion! That is, if the Church was to proclaim and teach a “truth” that contradicted what she had previously held as revealed, it would refute the claim that Jesus authorized his Church to teach in his name. The whole paradigm crumbles.

The ignorance of U.S. Catholics about their faith is a well known fact by now, though. When one looks at these polls, what they really indicate is a great need for catechesis, evangelization, and pastoral care.

Out of touch is absolutely correct! I was taken aback the other day to hear a Catholic in media describing the Church in between Pope Benedict’s resignation and the election of Pope Francis as…LEADERLESS! If Catholics these days do not understand or know who is the actual leader of the Church? No wonder everyone is so confused.

 

[Arandur]

This was my thought immediately. I wish our delegation consisted of faithful Catholics rather than those who have tried to disassociate their personal views with their public stance on the subject. Therer are many public figures who are devout Catholics…why not one of them instead?

I just hope Joe Biden doesn’t present himself for Communion during his trip to Rome.

Lisa

Boy, wouldn’t that be interesting!

My guess, though, is that if Pope Francis intends to immediately make a point of “eucharistic coherence,” he’ll have all the visitors coming to assist at the Mass briefed of this and simply asked to not present themselves–and he probably won’t have the ministers of communion memorize wanted posters or mug shots of those they should deny to. That would be a pretty huge controversy right off the bat.

Unfortunately, most of the political visitors are probably coming to just make an appearance, and haven’t really reflected on the deeper things that the election of a new pope signifies. I hope the Pope does make some high profile or controversial statements (the kind that may send the media into a tizzy, like how he slammed the Argentinian anti-family and anti-life initiatives), because I’m kind of sad that the media attention may die off soon. Even though a lot of the media attention is twisted and can be negative, it still forces the world to pay attention to some extent to just what the Church is and represents, and makes it difficult to just dismiss. I’ve commented on some of this in my new blog (linked in my sig); about how great a sign the Pope is to the world.

 

[BackToTheRock]

I’m checking out of this and all threads for a little. My wife had cancer surgery yesterday which is why I’m home today. She’s up and I have some husbandy care to provide. Plus the kids (and grandkids) are coming by to visit.

Thanks for some spirited and thought provoking exchanges regarding our faith. And thanks to Deacon Gary for his ministry to us in the Church!

 

[Tigg]

No they find it clearly but choose to ignore it just as other commandments are ignored because they prove restricting on one’s hedonistic pleasures. However do tell me truly CMatt, do you think if you stood before Christ and said "well ya know I’m not so sure that killing an unborn child is really murder and I helped out in a soup kitchen twice a year so it really doesn’t count does it?"

Jesus refers quite clearly to what is done to “the least of these” doesn’t he? Now you say he doesn’t speak specifically about abortion…well why would he? As a Jew at that time, he would never have imagined that this would become common practice. Further Jews felt children were a gift from God. You mention the Old Testament…how many stories of women who prayed for years, if not decades for a child? Jesus didn’t speak of abortion because this wasn’t even considered at the time.

Further you conflate state and federal laws with following the Gospels. It’s irrelevant to me that abortion, euthanasia and contraception are legal. I am not going to engage in such evil, nor will I support it with words or actions.

**CMatt you are nothing if not persistent but your same unsupported arguments are no more compelling on reading them for about the 99th time. It’s your soul not mine CMatt so I hope someday your heart is changed.
**
Lisa

THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU, for this post!

 

[Tigg]

Lisa, I say and claim no such thing. No where will you find me saying I support abortion. Or promoting my support for it. In fact I’m sure I have said the opposite. That if I were a woman, I personally *wouldn’t *have one. And how it is one of the most difficult issues. One which I have never taken lightly to this day and one which I have struggled with like no other. But as with many issues, I simply don’t see it as a black and white issue.

Thousands and thousands of posts ago, on a specific thread which I cannot name, and please be honest about this, did you not make the statement that you believed that abortion was not sinful - that the word wasn’t even in the Bible and further you upheld the beliefs of those who were pro-abortion? I do not remember your exact words, but would much appreciate a clarification, since this is your thread and we have heard so many times from you how you believe the poor and unfortunate trump the rights of unborn children in the womb.Your response will be helpful to us in further debate.

 

[Lapey]

No, I called myself a “relevantist” simply as a pun since the word “relativist” gets tossed around so frequently (I was hoping the tip-of-the-hat icon was a clue that this was not a serious statement). And yes, I 've read Cardinal Ratzinger’s writings on this although he is far from the first to do so. There are considerable writings on Modernism which predate him.

Sorry if I missed your point.

 

[Lapey]

I’m checking out of this and all threads for a little. My wife had cancer surgery yesterday which is why I’m home today. She’s up and I have some husbandy care to provide. Plus the kids (and grandkids) are coming by to visit.

Thanks for some spirited and thought provoking exchanges regarding our faith. And thanks to Deacon Gary for his ministry to us in the Church!

Peace and all good to you and your wife, you and she shall be in my afternoon prayer! God Bless!

 

[Lapey]

If you believe in relativism.

Actually, I believe in relevantism :tiphat:

No, I called myself a “relevantist” simply as a pun since the word “relativist” gets tossed around so frequently (I was hoping the tip-of-the-hat icon was a clue that this was not a serious statement). And yes, I 've read Cardinal Ratzinger’s writings on this although he is far from the first to do so. There are considerable writings on Modernism which predate him.

That pun went right past me, I do apologize!

 

[ProVobis]

but this is not supported in scripture.

You’re right, abortion isn’t mentioned much in scripture. (Although I’ve heard pro-abortionists making a case for it in Numbers 5.)

That’s why perhaps the Church follows the moral code of Cicero and early Church fathers in this regard.

 

[Lapey]

You’re right, abortion isn’t mentioned much in scripture. (Although I’ve heard pro-abortionists making a case for it in Numbers 5.)

That’s why perhaps the Church follows the moral code of Cicero and early Church fathers in this regard.

Not sure of your point again, there are countless mentions of love and plans for the unborn and unformed in scripture. There is no possible link to MM’s supposed protitute status and God’s love for the unborn. What am I missing?

 

[LisaA]

You’re right, abortion isn’t mentioned much in scripture. (Although I’ve heard pro-abortionists making a case for it in Numbers 5.)

That’s why perhaps the Church follows the moral code of Cicero and early Church fathers in this regard.

Again you proclaim “NOT NEWS!!” In the Jewish tradition a child was a gift of God, a sign of God’s favor, a sign of wealth. The idea that the Jews, followed by the early Christians didn’t speak about abortion is because it was no more a part of their lives than brain surgery. Elizabeth explained how the LACK of commentary on the subject is strong evidence that it was so inconceivable that it was simply not discussed.

Yes abortion had been a practice in certain cultures long before Jesus was born but it was not part of HIS culture. So why would he speak of it?

ProVobis you are much smarter than this kind of obfuscation. Come up with something that actually applies to the people and the time.

Lisa

 

[JMJSHJ]

Good morning Lisa. Allow me to clarify - I wasn’t saying that some GOP leaders said abortion should be promoted but that some didn’t believe it was wise to put these “cultural issues” such as abortion, birth control, and gay marriage front and center. In other words it’s more about shifting emphasis than flipping on support. I share the beliefs of many on this forum in supporting candidates who reflect our faith and, like many on this forum, have been on the losing side a lot in recent years. I’ll continue to support such candidates but I trust the Church a lot more than I trust the shifting sands of political process.

John McCain said that abortion is something that the GOP shouldn’t really discuss about

 

[DlandFan06]

Well, we got an older (and wiser) pope, but one who seems to be quite liberal on the most important social issues, such as poverty, and conservative on the personal issues of sexual morality and living a chaste, non-profligate, simple life. This gladdens my heart to no end. He is a leader we all can follow. I’m ecstatic! (Why did I ever doubt the Holy Spirit would fail in this. Shame on me.)

Liberal on social issues? What does that mean?

 

[The_Bucket]

Liberal on social issues? What does that mean?

It means that apparently everything needs to be seen through the prism of U.S. politics. Which is, of course, nonsense.

 

[LisaA]

It means that apparently everything needs to be seen through the prism of U.S. politics. Which is, of course, nonsense.

Oddly although Catholic teachings regarding life issues and serving the poor are neither liberal or conservative outside the prism of US politics, many do see these as opposing forces. But it’s all part of the same unbroken chain of perfect logic based on the inherent dignity of every human life. The very same protection and respect for every human life inspires both the opposition to abortion, euthanasia and caring for the poor. No conflict in the Church’s teaching is there?

Lisa